This points out the main problems:
The European Union
- Thread starter Cheetah
- Start date
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
This Mark Blyth guy is pretty cool, nice find. He's a political scientist of political economy btw, youtube title is misdirecting. w/e
Terxpahseyton
Nobody
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 10,759
I ranted a lot against the EU in previous threads - but I believe I always pointed out that the EU should be the opposite of what I complained about. For the reasons you say. But the EU is not. And what you refuse to see that the EU can not. Because the EU is designed to service capital. It basically is another free-trade agreement as TTIP is or CETA or all the others. Inspired by well-meant goals, for the public eye. But in practice ruled by capital.
None. Nobody even addressed the simple truth that what we call the forth branch of government - the media or the public - barely exists on EU level. The thing is, neither does it politically. There is no European consciousness of well-being. Nor on the public level. Neither on the political level. And of course not on the actual people level. And when a strive for actual well-being sinks into the mud - only abstract themes persist.
And that trend deserves to be opposed.
Because - the actual historic state of the economy matters - stupid. And there IS room to direct that. There IS room to help struggling industries while being free market. There IS room to support workers while being free market. There IS room to make financial markets productive rather than casinos while being free market. But free market occupied all of the room, since the 80s. While companies globalized, since the 70s. There IS room for A LOT while being free market. We learned that the hard way in the 30s. And it seems we will unlearn it until we will have no choice but to relearn it.
Richard Rorty, an American Standford philosopher, predicted in the 90s, that union and unorganized workers will realize that the government does not even try to stop their wages from sinking and will look for alternatives. I give you Trump. And all look for identity politics and hit on Sanders for refusing to do so. You are truly brilliant.
Of course - the worker of the day will say: "Well get a better qualification!" And while that strive for better ability is of course right, the corresponding annihilation of a common economic destiny the government is called to care for is the problem. And that is the problem globalization as well the political class as zero answers for.
Basically - we have a political class which gradually gave up on responsibility because capital liked it.
Well, glad to see you're not ranting now. If I may correct, the fourth power is the media. and the public elects all EU parliamentarians, but it is not counted as a power. Also, it must be because capital rules the EU that we have such heated discussions over trade agreements. You may not be ranting, but your factual accuracy level hasn't gone up much.
Well, freedom isn't about how something sounds. You may be unaware of this, but censorship was quite common in the good old days. And as I already explained, freedom of speech is about voicing opinions. Insults aren't opinions, oddly. Nor is annoying your neighbours with noise because you think you have freedom of speech. Strange, but true.
Last edited:
Verbose
Deity
No that's still putting the cart before the horse. The EU has a political problem with not getting stuck in the national political level. It can only change when national politics recognizes the limitations of trying to confront the nocive effects of neoliberal economics gone global. The EU is a political project that needs more politics, and not the retreat to mere national solutions at that. But until the national political situations allow that to happen, it won't.
As for capital — well, as long as the chose economic model is capitalist, and this operates through actual markets, it is going to be impossible to prevent market operators from trying to find opportunities and advantages in ANY situation, since that is what the market does. Which is why politics makes a difference.
Last edited:
If only the politics on the EU level were not detached from reality currupted bunch which doesnt make much sense they are I could perhaps agree with you on that. Meanwhile to move more power towards that irrational sold out bigots would mean a disaster.
Terxpahseyton
Nobody
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 10,759
ATverbose
Well that whole post is just a hymn to internationalism. While lacking any recognition of the problems inherent to that ideology. I am saying that the EU could but will not be a solution of the problems associated with globalization. All you muster in response is that the EU needs to be more detached from national interests. Have you ever wondered what is left after that? I'll tell you: empty ahistorical abstract ideas. In other words, carrying effective measures to help people to the graveyard. All hail the market.
And a lazy utterly meaningless sidenote about capital interests always being there. Verbose, I have come to enjoy your posts - but you prove to be just another lemming of general zeitgeist-doctrine. Ultimately consumed by the logic of choosing between two sides.
You know there was a time when it was common state policy sense that the state has to properly direct our free economies so that they will actually serve all the people. Now we only discuss how to handle trade. Guess who framed us to do so.
Any imp can see how the relationship of productivity and income got smashed by outsourcing. Yet this is no topic for actual policy. Guess who framed us to do so.
In the 50s and 60s globalization was weaker than before WWI.
There is so much to discuss about our economies. Historical actual development, shaping what actually is happening. All we do discuss is employment and growth and trade. It is pathetic. And the EU will change that? Hahhahaha.... If a collective European effort is required, it won't be the EU serving it, for all I can see. It will be national governments pushed to do so by the people and simply agreeing to do so.
Well that whole post is just a hymn to internationalism. While lacking any recognition of the problems inherent to that ideology. I am saying that the EU could but will not be a solution of the problems associated with globalization. All you muster in response is that the EU needs to be more detached from national interests. Have you ever wondered what is left after that? I'll tell you: empty ahistorical abstract ideas. In other words, carrying effective measures to help people to the graveyard. All hail the market.
And a lazy utterly meaningless sidenote about capital interests always being there. Verbose, I have come to enjoy your posts - but you prove to be just another lemming of general zeitgeist-doctrine. Ultimately consumed by the logic of choosing between two sides.
You know there was a time when it was common state policy sense that the state has to properly direct our free economies so that they will actually serve all the people. Now we only discuss how to handle trade. Guess who framed us to do so.
Any imp can see how the relationship of productivity and income got smashed by outsourcing. Yet this is no topic for actual policy. Guess who framed us to do so.
In the 50s and 60s globalization was weaker than before WWI.
There is so much to discuss about our economies. Historical actual development, shaping what actually is happening. All we do discuss is employment and growth and trade. It is pathetic. And the EU will change that? Hahhahaha.... If a collective European effort is required, it won't be the EU serving it, for all I can see. It will be national governments pushed to do so by the people and simply agreeing to do so.
Last edited:
Akka
Moody old mage.
That's a consequence of, basically, the UK - who tried as hard as it could to prevent a political integration which was the core of the EU idea, and tried (at least partially successfully) to transform it in just a free-trade zone. It's not going to be easy, but now that the UK is out, we might have a chance again to put the EU back on rails.
That being said, even in its current incarnation, the EU is still better than nothing. It still forces the other huge economical partners (like USA and China) to respect some minimal criterium of consumer protection, that would be nonexistent without it.
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,550
That's not what you said though, hence that's not what I disagreed with.
Verbose
Deity
It had better.
And the EU IS already the national governments. The EU democratic deficit is directly due to not divesting more than a fraction of power from the national governments to it. It CANNOT be more democratic than it currently is, because that would directly cut into the sovereignty of the national governments, and that has been consistently nixed. (It's why Brexit won't be negotiated in Brussels, but with the 27 member state governments. That the Brexiters, well… misrepresent… the EU is another matter entirely.)
So, if not the EU, then what?
The political currents right now is to nationally turn inward, and try to pip the other guys in a race to the bottom. Do you think that is going to work?
The countries that ALREADY have large domestic markets (mostly the US, China might get there, maybe India and Brazil eventually, unless Brazil hobbles itself, which it seems set to) will hack it, protect their domestic markets, and try to screw everyone else in the trade deals (typically bilateral). The countries that have small domestic markets will certainly do the same, but the scale effects tell us they will be dead meat. And that's about it.
Which is where the EU comes in to start with. It's instead of everyone of a huuuge domestic market for everyone that lacks one, and in Europe that's relatively speaking everyone, Germany included.
Of course, if the notion is to go straight for planned economy, alternatively some form of state capitalism, then it might not apply for political reasons. The planned economies still come with problems of efficiency and effects of scale, and the state capitalism version also does nothing to address a lack of bulk in a domestic market, which still singles you out for victimhood in that kind of environment.
No, that's because the UK needs agreements with individual EU members now. So Brussels doesn't come into play. Which was the point of the Brexit, meaning they are getting exactly what they voted for.
Brussels does come into play with regard to disentangling the various treaties, rules and agreements the UK agreed to while in the EU. This should be finished within 2 years. But again, this is mostly the UK's job as well.
Then there is the legal process within the UK itself, where Brussels doesn't come into play either.
So, in short, Brexit voters are getting exactly what they voted for.
Last edited:
Verbose
Deity
It doesn't come into play because the EU is simply not fundamentally set up in such a fashion that there's a centre there to negotiate with. It's the individual member states governments that decide. That the Brexiters has obfuscated the matter of how the EU actually works is another thing entirely.
That is not entirely correct, because there is the European Committee. But you are right in that essentially the EU is set up as a democracy, where common decisions need to be agreed upon by all members (or a consensus thereof). That, however, is not the reason why the UK now needs to negotiate treaties with individual members. That simply follows from the Brexit and the UK's continued need for such treaties.
FriendlyFire
Codex WMDicanious
Liberalism has failed ?
And now its time to try Nationalism again because that system is superior
HAND
Armchair Philosopher
I am of the opinion that the EEC/EU had a better arrangement and was a happier place 25 years ago, pre-Maastricht treaty, pre-Euro. The Euro is just not needed to have cohesive, cooperative European community. To be honest, France and other Mediterranean Euro countries would be better off going back to their own currencies and devaluing. Such countries need the flexibility with the value of their exports which the Euro simply doesn't allow.
Last edited:
Farm Boy
they're all reactions
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 27,963
His clips in that video are excellent.
Mark Blyth is awesome. I only found out about him a few weeks ago too.
Lexicus
Deity
I just Googled him
It looks like the title of one of the books on his Wikipedia page
(2002) Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
is an explicit nod to Karl Polanyi's Great Transformation. Looking up the book it seems the nod is more than just in the title.
Looks like Blyth is a cool guy. Also found this paper where he defends Polanyi against some critics. I've known about him for five minutes and already he's scoring huge points.
It looks like the title of one of the books on his Wikipedia page
(2002) Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
is an explicit nod to Karl Polanyi's Great Transformation. Looking up the book it seems the nod is more than just in the title.
Looks like Blyth is a cool guy. Also found this paper where he defends Polanyi against some critics. I've known about him for five minutes and already he's scoring huge points.
Similar threads
